I believe (part two...
-
I should also admit, before I turn the floor over completely to you'all, that my long and winding road was a journey not much directed...more a meandering of fluctuating openness and closed-off-edness(?). Most of it was unconscious and certainly not partitioned with street names (those came lately and are mostly only an allegorical device). I'm just recently scrubbing the sleep from my eyes and looking clearly for what there is to see.
-
Tom
I see that you wish to battle my thoughts on Your struggle to find divinity. I agree with Juan in the sense that lifes most treasured secrets have no words to describe. For example. What does your soul look like? I thank you for attempting to reply to my post in the vernacular that you feel is best suited to get me to begin another mud slinging session. But this topic is really too cut & dry for me to mince words with one who is admittedly not clear of direction. Your own thoughts make my point much better than I could ever hope to. As demonstrated best by your taste in music. If you are comparing a true genius who is clearly touched by the hand of God to Bobby McFarren Sir you are....... yet againWrong.
By the way you should re read your post to me you really do not do your self any service to your intelligence. In short it is in line with your thoughts on this topic line. Senseless, wondering?, and poorly applied. See the edit tab above and try to get it right. Your secret will be safe with me.As for your question "What about me?" What would you like to know? For me my honesty here is unquestionable unless you can show me otherwise? I freely admit my failings and my reasonings. You really don't get it at all its not all about the attack its about the counterpoint. Dodge, perry, strike.
GoD -
the thing about that ...that elusive Yellow Brick Road...is, i think, that we must remember that we are made as whole and that the questions we ask ourselves by the rational way, is inside that whole thing we are.
so even the highest question we can ask is under the whole corporeal frame we are in, and because the desire of living always wins , as the desire of living is the motor of our life itself, that means that the mental approach to things is under it.
So, the answers must be felt. and that take us to be able to understand them without words¡¡¡ -
those last words are to be written on the book
-
remember is the one_two_three game we were avoiding, was not it ?
I cant get used to your name
, why goon ?, why goon of dom ? why not be yourself in here ?
we are not so bad people Jimmy ---
---
(both ways wink) -
@juanv.soler said:
ey goon of doom, GoD, remember is the one_two_three game we were avoiding, was not it ?
cant get used to your name, why goon ?, why goon of dom ? why not be yourself in here ?
we are not so bad peopleLa llama no es comforteble para ti?
Yo se ingles es no tu palabras premero,
La gama es la gama
En ingles baboso es de este. D-u-m-b Es tu intiendes de este pregunta arriba?
mi preferencia es mehor la llama aqi.
Yo se. nosotros es mi amigos tambien. Me gusta much mis amigos aqui. -
well you have put it difficult here for me Jimmy. i give the translation i have obtained from the Free Translation, plus :
Is not the flame comfortable for you?
To speak in english is to not putting your own words at the first.
The scale is the scale
In english driveling it belongs to this one. D-u-m-b Es (it means) do you understand at all the question that is asked above?
My preference is (better) mejor the flame (la llama) aquí (in here).
I know. you are my friends also. I like very much my friends here.
well, i think i have got a lot to learn about the english language yet.
y muchas Gracias , amigooh, the heart is feeling better keep the silence
besides its Sunday
ciao
-
Juan, you are a better man than I...but I'm trying :`) Thanks for being such a good example!
-
@unknownuser said:
There is a question I am asking myself - I know there is a God = Love, it is a matter of my own experience rather then faith, that doesn't want to hide. He want to have a 'supper' with us. Tomasz
Lovely metaphor, Tomasz...sits well with the peace of mind I use to explore these thoughts. I have often thought of God = Life Force: which for me includes both Love/Good and Ill-will/Evil, the cancerous (at the risk of more mockery/i.e.counterpoint from YnW) dark side of this force. Something both within and without of my spirit.
My favorite image of its power and tenacity is the morning glory vine that in just one season covered the railings, grew up the wall, and over the back door of another place I lived...blooming beautifully all the next summer long. It started from a single seed blown by the wind into a crack in the concrete at the edge of my drive. At the time I allowed myself some foolish pride for noticing the out of place single blossom and chosing to avoid running over it...but remain amazed at the perseverance of its LifeForce to bloom before it leafed, and so was noticed.
-
God is Love. Just exactly that. It doesn't say God wants people to love, or God indulges in love Himself or God is represented by love. It says God IS Love....one and the same thing. When you love, you manifest a little bit more of God.
-
Alan...wow!
And love is...?
(Not being facetious at all, I'm really interesting in hearing more. Is love only internal: feeling loved and/or loving? Or is it an external thing transferable? What constitutes love that can manifest? Is God only internal, or external as well? More please!)
-
@juanv.soler said:
the thing about that ...that elusive Yellow Brick Road...is, i think, that we must remember that we are made as whole and that the questions we ask ourselves by the rational way, is inside that whole thing we are.
so even the highest question we can ask is under the whole corporeal frame we are in, and because the desire of living always wins , as the desire of living is the motor of our life itself, that means that the mental approach to things is under it.
So, the answers must be felt. and that take us to be able to understand them without words¡¡¡Juan, what a wonderful analogy! Concise and yet inclusive as usual. (Though I didn't know if by "!Guau" you meant Woof! or Wow!, so thanks for explaining :`) This may well fit quite nicely with the way I think of it...if I may add I think it is important to question rationally, because I know when my mind is well wrapped around an idea about the way of things, a perspective of how it all falls together, my "whole" is less conflicted and more at peace.
-
all I can think about it is, that as breathing is the conductive path for living, outside and inside merges in us.
Dont know about God.
Tom, do not put weight on me)
thanks -
see what happened ?
it went to the bottom -
@tomsdesk said:
And love is...?
Poets, musicians, artists - they are all trying to describe it.
You can fill it Tom, everyone who loves a little knows God a little.
It as a true readiness to give everything you are, burn away yourself for the loved one.
Now imagine the personalized love - love which 'IS'. Imagine how the Love can love.@tomsdesk said:
Is love only internal: feeling loved and/or loving? Or is it an external thing transferable? What constitutes love that can manifest? Is God only internal, or external as well? More please!)
The love is omnipresent. I would risk that a theory that even a matter is made of love. We all are.
'Our Father' and Franciscan brotherhood with a nature is not a coincidence. We are woven of Love.
It is why if one denies it and turns into violence and hate it destroys himself. He\she denies very self.
On the other hand - someone deeply inspired by love will not only grow but will let others see the light.I like Juan's analogy - the Love & an air. The Love isn't something that one can posses. You can breath it in and let it do its job - give it away. Love is dynamic like an air.
Tom-ash
-
how beautiful Tom-ash
thank_you -
I have debated whether or not to enter this discussion. However I think there are things I need to say. I respect this community and the openness we strive to achieve. Also Alan, I hold you in high regard... I have some questions.
You say:
@alan fraser said:
God is Love. Just exactly that. It doesn't say God wants people to love, or God indulges in love Himself or God is represented by love. It says God IS Love....one and the same thing. When you love, you manifest a little bit more of God.
“It” says that Alan? What says that? Surely you are not citing the Bible. You don’t believe in the validity of the Bible according to your statements in this thread: http://www.sketchucation.com/forums/scf/viewtopic.php?f=179&t=12160&st=0&sk=t&sd=a
You think that there are some great lessons in the Bible but that it is not dictated by God. So what prompts you to make the statement “God is Love?” How do you know? Where are you getting your information from? What is the “It” you are referring to?@alan fraser said:
“I do actually believe in God....I even attend church more than most; and I think there are some great lessons in the Bible. But I also believe that those other guys I mentioned...and modern science in general, have it correct.”
Surely not these guys:
- Dawkins. He is an atheist. By definition he believes there is no God, cut and dry.
- Sagan. He was an agnostic and neither believed in God nor did he discount the possibility. That there was just no proof either way.
- Hawking? I will quote him: “It is better not to use the word "god" to describe what I believe because most people use the word to mean a being with which one can have a personal relationship.” Does he even know? Does it matter?
%(#BF8000)[- Darwin. Ok, you already covered him but let me recap some of your statements...@alan fraser said:
“He was bound for the clergy before he ever set foot aboard the Beagle.”
Did that mean he was a Christian at one time? Surely he had to believe to some degree or he would not have been on that original path.
@alan fraser said:
“Darwin's son Francis wrote a book about his father in which no mention was made that his father was ever converted. Quite the contrary, he confirmed that he was an agnostic, an unbeliever until his dying day.”
So which was he? Personally it makes no difference to me but your statements don’t seem to mesh. So we'll say he is an agnostic as his son was probably the closest to him.]
Ok, you believe these guys have it correct yet the way I see it, they don’t fundamentally agree. Correct me if I am wrong; Hawking talks about and believes in his definition of God, whatever that is. Dawkins believes there is no God and Darwin and Sagan believed it improbable, not impossible.
What is it then that they have correct?@alan fraser said:
I believe in Carl Sagan, Richard Dawkins, Stephen Hawking and Charles Darwin.
How can you believe in God and Dawkins at the same time?
My last question... well I am finding it hard to ask without it sounding like an attack. Sorry if it does.
You also say ”I even attend church more than most.” I am assuming it is a Christian church? If not I deeply apologize.
So why do you go? If you don't believe the Bible is God's word then what is there to gain for your attending church?
Professed atheists on this forum are rallying behind your arguments yet your statements and actions are inconsistent.
Dare I say, hypocritical?I respect you Alan, I am just not following.
Tom, I appreciate your quest. You ask sincerely, “What do you believe?”
Well, I believe the Bible is the word of God. You guys keep saying the Bible is nonsense. Well the writings and “saviors of science” you guys keep quoting don’t even seem to agree with each other. I get my morals and direction from the Bible that was inspired by God, written down by man and translated into different languages for the betterment of mankind, yes by man. But I also trust the wisdom of those who translated the Bible, voted on which books were to be in the Cannon and who undoubtedly prayed to God at length about which directions and actions to take; seeking God’s guidance rather than man’s.
Someone here made the argument that God does not speak to his people like in Old Testament times. True, he speaks to us now in a different way. When Jesus came he “sealed the deal”. Then God changed his communication methods. Now it is through his word (Bible), through the Holy Spirit and through prayer, people and circumstances.
I am a Father, a Son and Husband; three “personalities” of the same person. I believe in a one true living God who is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Call it what you will, I call it the Trinity.
Tom, you say:
@tomsdesk said:
“I've talked to a lot of different makes and models of Christians over the years trying to resolve my true beliefs with my childhood tutelage: never met two who believed the same across the board (more often not much beyond my point).”
I agree with you there but the one thing that all Christians believe is that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who died for our sins and through Him we have salvation. All other doctrines, politics and what not that we might disagree on does not define our salvation. God won’t deny heaven to one if he believes the earth to be 6000 years old and not to another if he believes it to be 4.5 Billion years old. It is not a salvation issue. If you use this argument to discount Christianity you might as well say that SketchUp is not a 3D modeling program because not everyone who uses it does so exactly the same way.
"You don't use the Outliner?" "No, I use Layers exclusively". "WHAT ARE WE DOING?" "Maybe we should try Revit now!"
I considered not quoting any scripture seeing as it is falling on deaf ears here but I just don’t think I could do my argument or my faith any justice if I do not.
Psalms 118:8 says; "It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man."
God has never let me down and he never will.
I believe I will trust in God, not man.I also believe in respecting other people and their beliefs. And as flawed as I am I also try to live my life as an example of my faith while trying to bring the love of God to whomever seeks it.
With Respect,
Eric%(#800000)[On a lighter note:
What does a Dyslexic, Agnostic Insomniac do? Sits up all night wondering if there really is a DOG.] -
Eric,
I'm not at all offended (and I apologize in advance if I misunderstand you) but because that other thread is so long I don't want anyone to get the wrong idea about what I've been saying. My post you quoted was in defense of this post, which had been questioned as false:@tomsdesk said:
Guess I shouldn't apologize for mincing words (since it is a pretty big theme here today :`) so I won't: Isn't there a big difference in meaning between "Christianity" and "Christian Church Doctrine"?
It is my understanding that the former is the belief that Jesus was the Christ son of God who is the only path to redemption and salvation. The later is a set of sect beliefs agreed to by a group of Christians...often thought of by said same as the only way to be a true Christian.
I certainly haven't been arguing against Christianity...whatever floats your boat about Jesus is fine with me. All I can say at this moment is: I believe he was a wise teacher and certainly a great prophet of the Bible because of his message of living a loving life.
-
It was written above, a few times, that "God is love"
Behold a partial 'formula' of "love"
:"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth."
[1 Corinthians 13:4-6 (NIV)]In the same time, God is JUST...
Cornel
-
The answer's quite simple, Eric. One quote of mine you didn't use was "It can't be said loud enough of often enough; Intelligent Design or Creationism is NOT science. Confusing Faith with Science is symptomatic of people who aren't clear about the distinction between the two and who, therefore, are in no position to teach either."
I do believe that Dawkins et al have it correct scientifically. I do believe the Earth is 4.5 billion years old or thereabouts. I also believe that much of the Old Testament is folklore and much of the New Testament is severely edited. There is more missing from the NT than is included...like the Gospel of St Thomas...every bit as valid as the other four. What mere human can decide what is the word of God and what isn't?...and if they maybe got that wrong, what else did they get wrong?
This is nothing new; people were saying as much in Elizabethan times...even early Christian times...and questioning the authority of the established Church.
However, all that does not preclude me having any faith at all. I may believe Dawkins' and Darwin's science, that doesn't mean I adhere to their faith. The two things are entirely separate.I go to church because I get something from it. That doesn't mean I have to swallow it hook, line and sinker. Certainly on this side of the pond that is going to put me firmly in the majority. I don't have any more problem with that than all the catholics I know that don't believe in transubstantiation...which is all of them.
Advertisement